If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Roger Ebert is dumb

Originally Posted by Tasos

"Oh well, on a lighter note... I went exploring the world today with a few other testers. As we traversed the landscape, I was constantly reminded of the gameplay video. Always, in the past, I've seen gameplay videos and screenshots touched up by a professional staff and given a production quality that surpasses the game experience. So I've come to be a little cynical against trusting what is more accurately "marketing propaganda" instead of genuine advertisements about a game. This wasn't the case at all in Darkfall. As we made our way through the world, the feeling of adventure and awe was just as much there... no, more pronounced than the gameplay video would have you see. If I could correlate the majesty of Darkfall in any sensible way to some one who hasn't played it, it would be to tell them "Look again at Aventurine's long gameplay video... and this time, even if it's hard to do now that you're grizzled from all the lies and deceit you've been fed by other games in the past, don't be afraid to let your imagination run wild".

Upon running to a distant castle we spotted over a frozen lake, hopping between the floating ice blocks as fast as our stubby dwarven legs would take us, it was like a book coming to life in front of me. Only in this case the book was a particular scene from the gameplay video where that very thing had played out. Something so simple as that in a video can spark the imagination. Sure, we all looked at that and said "Man, those guys in the video are going out on a cool adventure!" but is the game really going to be like that? Are you really going to be solemnly exploring the rich world with your friends at your side, without a watered down experience where you're more practically chasing down some flashing waypoint in easy-mode? Yes, you absolutely are, and every bit of back-story and reasoning you interpreted into the motives of those intrepid explorers are there as well. I guess with the current trend in gaming, the grandeur of simple things has been completely lost on much of the current generation of gamer... but I sure in the hell was impressed that I could have such a fulfilling experience from something so base as mere wanderlust.

Of course, it helped cap off the night that the location we were traveling to was just itching to dish out wholesale slaughter on anyone curious enough to take a peek. I felt like I was being shelled by artillery after some of the mobs unloaded their repertoire of spells on us. Screen shaking, firebombs exploding all around you, your friends screaming obscenities and running away... the game definitely has a tendency to abruptly take your head out of the clouds and grind your face into the dirt with its heel on the back of your head with no warning at all. And this was just the PvE! PvE!"

I have never had any respect for Ebert as a critic of movies. "2 thumbs up!" lol?

But, I believe that to gain the position and prestige he has that he must have at one point and time in his life, been a good movie critic. I think he's probably talented at being a critic in seeing beauty or art within something such as film, but just sell-out in the end that helps to promote movies rather than critique them.

Anyways, Ebert has argued that video games lack the potential to become a higher form of art such as painting, literature, or film.

At first I thought, "yeah say that to all the current digital artists whom were formally trained in classical arts." Hell, lots of concept art is painted on a canvas.

Then I thought, just because video games employ artists, doesn't necessarily make the video games themselves art. I started to see his point but I wasn't ready to accept it because video games are relatively new even compared to something like film. After all, a dictator could have an artist paint propaganda posters for him simply because of his skill, yet the outcome is just crappy propaganda kitsch that is lacking in any real artistic value.

I'm studying for a career in the gaming industry and I take some courses in design, life drawing, art history. Art is very hard to define, but one thing i've come to define it as, is art is never a means to an ends. It's an ends within itself. People don't have their portrait painted or buy any other kind of paint to accomplish a task, they do it to have it.

Now my point. Reading Tasos's quote of the beta tester's post reaffirmed what I have been brooding over in my own head why I think video games might could be a higher form of art comparable to any of the other fine arts. The thing that has always tripped me up on my own logic is that video games are interactive, and you're trying to have fun.

I don't know if Darkfall is as great as that guy says it is, but if it is that great to him, then Aventurine has created a game that through the game's aesthetic and visual qualities of creating a breathtaking world to look at; the game's programming to allow the player to interact with the world in a very specific way, the game's lore content; the game features themselves; and everything else that goes into creating the gaming experience; when it all works in a proper harmony, it does communicate a message. It's not simply "just fun to play" or some form of escapism, it's a working form of expression that gives people a new way of experiencing a fictional world that other forms of art can't do.

Ebert is not dumb because he doesn't agree. He's dumb because he never gave video games the proper respect to begin with and jumped the gun on behalf of his ego.

I have never had any respect for Ebert as a critic of movies. "2 thumbs up!" lol?

But, I believe that to gain the position and prestige he has that he must have at one point and time in his life, been a good movie critic. I think he's probably talented at being a critic in seeing beauty or art within something such as film, but just sell-out in the end that helps to promote movies rather than critique them.

Anyways, Ebert has argued that video games lack the potential to become a higher form of art such as painting, literature, or film.

At first I thought, "yeah say that to all the current digital artists whom were formally trained in classical arts." Hell, lots of concept art is painted on a canvas.

Then I thought, just because video games employ artists, doesn't necessarily make the video games themselves art. I started to see his point but I wasn't ready to accept it because video games are relatively new even compared to something like film. After all, a dictator could have an artist paint propaganda posters for him simply because of his skill, yet the outcome is just crappy propaganda kitsch that is lacking in any real artistic value.

I'm studying for a career in the gaming industry and I take some courses in design, life drawing, art history. Art is very hard to define, but one thing i've come to define it as, is art is never a means to an ends. It's an ends within itself. People don't have their portrait painted or buy any other kind of paint to accomplish a task, they do it to have it.

Now my point. Reading Tasos's quote of the beta tester's post reaffirmed what I have been brooding over in my own head why I think video games might could be a higher form of art comparable to any of the other fine arts. The thing that has always tripped me up on my own logic is that video games are interactive, and you're trying to have fun.

I don't know if Darkfall is as great as that guy says it is, but if it is that great to him, then Aventurine has created a game that through the game's aesthetic and visual qualities of creating a breathtaking world to look at; the game's programming to allow the player to interact with the world in a very specific way, the game's lore content; the game features themselves; and everything else that goes into creating the gaming experience; when it all works in a proper harmony, it does communicate a message. It's not simply "just fun to play" or some form of escapism, it's a working form of expression that gives people a new way of experiencing a fictional world that other forms of art can't do.

Ebert is not dumb because he doesn't agree. He's dumb because he never gave video games the proper respect to begin with and jumped the gun on behalf of his ego.

a bit long, but basically agree

I see no reason why games and film can't be considered the same artistically

i have to imagine part of his reasoning might have been the limitations video games have in terms of their ability to portray realistic images. Of course, as time has gone on, graphics have continually sky rocketed in quality, and the idea of portraying art through a video game, or rather having a video game be art becomes much more plausible. Also, i think he associates video games with rather vulgar entertainment, veiling any artistic elements present in games.
I don't agree with ebert at all, but why was darkfall made? to kill people, the sky and the environment are there to add realism, not to be focused on.
alright, i'm done playing the devil's advocate, i think ebert should stick with reviewing movies.

If he can't consider a video game art, either, he is a fool. The same amount, if not more, of work is present in video games as in movies. Darkfall has been in development for seven years, about the same time it takes to make a larger-scale movie like Lord of the Rings (It took six years, I believe). Video games are an art, but to properly critique them, you have to develop a sense of what they're made to do, and what purpose the game in question serves. I wouldn't expect a critic who's used to rating movies and conventional pieces of art to rate video games accurately, or even see them as art.

The man who always says "Two Thumbs Up!" as his remarks for movies. Honestly I think he's a generic critic who shouldn't be taken seriously if he doesn't have the ingenuity to come up with a different phrase than "Two-Thumbs Up!".

Anyways, Ebert has argued that video games lack the potential to become a higher form of art such as painting, literature, or film.

In my opinion he is trying to compare apples to air, and is misguided by it. Video games are, by their very nature, an "experience" rather than a work of art, but many people still evaluate the game on visuals and sound alone, and it seems Ebert does the same thing. Doesn't make them worse any more than an apple is worse than air and vice versa. A painting offers a still snapshot with a limited angle, nothing more. Literature offers a story but no matter how graphic it is, the reader has to supply the visuals and sounds. Film is closer to video games, but lacks the interactivity and choice, and there's a limit in length, most video games even today last 10 hrs, while it's not uncommon for older, higher quality video games to pack 50+ hrs.

Take a vampire bat, for example, and assume you've never seen one or heard one:
-A painting of the bat would not tell you anything about its mode of movement, the sounds it makes, the speed and agility.

-Literature could describe it in great detail, with your imagination composing the image, and yet, the image would be wrong. Try to describe a wine glass with words (no gestures) to someone who's never seen one and ask them to draw it, and they would get it wrong.

-Movies are closest to video games, but are for the most part shown from a cameraman's point of view, not one of the actors. They would show a bat in flight, play the sound it makes and show you the agility and the speed. But it would not show you what it would be like to BE the bat. Only a video game is capable of that, to put you in control, and feed you visual and audio data as you control the simulated object.

Other than that, software design is a creative process, same as painting or literature or filmmaking. You can either think of it as art, the art of creating an "experience", or not.

of course it's an Art form...just a different one...like how sculpture is different than music...

but as a great Man once said...

Originally Posted by Groucho Marx

Well, Art is Art, isn't it? Still, on the other hand, water is water. And east is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does. Now you tell me what you know.